Empowerment in der agilen Arbeitswelt

Boes, Andreas; Gül, Katrin; Kämpf, Tobias; Lühr, Thomas

doi:10.1007/978-3-662-62215-5_20

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Future studies may see this research gap as an opportunity: Conducting additional quantitative studies that investigate the relationship between APM and psychological empowerment may solidify the evidence base while also shedding light on the distinction between “doing agile” and “being agile” (Eilers et al, 2020). Although the sole application of APM frameworks (“doing agile”) is argued to have limited (or even detrimental) impact on project outcomes (Miller, 2013), their holistic interpretation of empowering the project team (“being agile”) should unleash its full potential (Boes et al, 2021). Furthermore, future studies may employ a dimensional approach to psychological empowerment and investigate the differential effects of APM on the four empowerment dimensions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The affective, behavioural and cognitive outcomes of agile project management: A preliminary meta‐analysis

Koch

Drazic

Schermuly

2023

J Occupat & Organ Psyc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agile project management (APM) refers to a set of project management frameworks that are increasingly common in a range of industries. Even though the positive effects of APM for employees and organizations are widely assumed, no systematic account of affective, behavioural and cognitive outcomes appears in the academic literature. In this pre‐registered meta‐analysis, we examine the effects of APM based on K = 40 records (with k = 41 independent studies, N = 73,825). Our analyses indicate the beneficial effects of APM across outcomes: For the affective outcomes of job satisfaction, affective strain and organizational commitment, the effect sizes were, on average, small. For the behavioural outcomes of performance and innovative behaviour, the effect sizes were medium to large. For the cognitive outcome of psychological empowerment, the results of our meta‐analysis suggest a medium effect. Furthermore, we explore the moderating effects of contextual (team size, occupational groups, culture) and methodological boundary conditions (publication status, study design, levels of analysis, study quality). Compared to studies conducted with software developers, the effect sizes are stronger in other occupations, such as manufacturing, health care and logistics. Moreover, stronger effect sizes are found in published than in unpublished records. We conclude by discussing the state of quantitative APM research and highlight avenues for future study.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%